(Skirmish mode) The irrelevancy of 2 handed classes

[EbdanianAdmiral]

It makes them lose DPS power by removing their throwing weapons.

With the solution I proposed both units would retain an option for throwing weapons. The Volgier keeps his franceska and the Savage keeps his javelins. The perk would replace a redundant throwing weapon slot and add something that opens up a completely new way to play the class.

In terms of menavlion and beserker I honestly don't think they should have shields because

• Both of their respective factions already have very good inf in their current state
• I honestly feel these classes would be overpowered in TDM and Siege if they had shields.

 

[Yukmouth++]

With the solution I proposed both units would retain an option for throwing weapons. The Volgier keeps his franceska and the Savage keeps his javelins. The perk would replace a redundant throwing weapon slot and add something that opens up a completely new way to play the class.

In terms of menavlion and beserker I honestly don't think they should have shields because

• Both of their respective factions already have very good inf in their current state
• I honestly feel these classes would be overpowered in TDM and Siege if they had shields.

This is not about TDM and Siege. All the balancing we're talking about here should only apply to skirmish. What would be the alternative to making these 2 classes relevant in skirmish without a shield ?

 

[EbdanianAdmiral]

This is not about TDM and Siege. All the balancing we're talking about here should only apply to skirmish. What would be the alternative to making these 2 classes relevant in skirmish without a shield ?

There really isnt one, but having a unique set of perks for every gamemode would be an absolute mess to balance and would create confusion for players trying to learn the classes. Its much more reasonable to ask taleworlds to give shields to 3/5 shock inf rather than expecting them to have 3 seperate balances for 3 separate styles of gamemode. If those 2 classes being less than ideal in skirmish is the tradeoff for 2 of the 3 most popular gamemodes skipping out on major balance issues then thats a fair tradeoff.

I say that Menav and Beserker could potentially be OP with a shield because both classes have weapons that are MUCH longer than what other classes have available. Im imaging in my head a Menav troop with a shield run up to someone, put away the shield as soon as the archer puts his bow away, and immediately start skeying and swinging. The Archer is outreached, and he cant catch the menav to get in his classes melee range because the menav has much higher athletics. If the archer backs up and draws his bow the menav just pulls his shield and the process starts over. Im not worried about this interaction happening with the other shock classes because they all have comparatively shorter twohanded weapons that are much less abuse inviting.

Thats a frustrating interaction that TW should really try to avoid.

 

[FBohler]

Regarding one on one combat, two handers are able to one shot pretty much any enemy with a well placed strike.

 

[Yukmouth++]

Regarding one on one combat, two handers are able to one shot pretty much any enemy with a well placed strike.

They died from arrows and throwing weapons long ago before going in a 1 on 1

 

[WMorton]

Honestly i think if you buff the 2hander then skirmish will turn into the choatic two hander spam that it used to be and that tdm and siege still are. Find a way around that but firstly 2 handed weapons are not faster, generally, than 1 handed weapons. Yet we see this alot in the game whether it be the falx or many of the 2 handed axes, and romphia, course I will admit there is footwork involved for some of them but still, point being I dont want it to return to a bunch of noob kids screaming reeeeeeeeeeee as they charge me with 6 menavlions and the only things that will protect me being my shield will be destroyed and my throwables or shootables will be nerfed to the point where it wont matter if I shoot because we are ****ed anyways.

 

[Yukmouth++]

Honestly i think if you buff the 2hander then skirmish will turn into the choatic two hander spam that it used to be and that tdm and siege still are. Find a way around that but firstly 2 handed weapons are not faster, generally, than 1 handed weapons. Yet we see this alot in the game whether it be the falx or many of the 2 handed axes, and romphia, course I will admit there is footwork involved for some of them but still, point being I dont want it to return to a bunch of noob kids screaming reeeeeeeeeeee as they charge me with 6 menavlions and the only things that will protect me being my shield will be destroyed and my throwables or shootables will be nerfed to the point where it wont matter if I shoot because we are ****ed anyways.

What would be your compromise ? They are 100% absent from skirmish at this moment. Nobody play them when they are serious.

 

[WMorton]

What would be your compromise ? They are 100% absent from skirmish at this moment. Nobody play them when they are serious.

Like you said its just a matter of how they are played, you have to flank with them. Its a unit that you have to Gamble with, im just saying buffing the **** outa them and nerfing their opponents is just going to cause another issue for the 2 months that it takes Taleworlds to ever fix anything

 

[Yukmouth++]

Like you said its just a matter of how they are played, you have to flank with them. Its a unit that you have to Gamble with, im just saying buffing the **** outa them and nerfing their opponents is just going to cause another issue for the 2 months that it takes Taleworlds to ever fix anything

Only the savage has the necessary movement speed to flank. What i said is thats how they should be placed in the meta, but its not the case, they do not have any tool that makes them better flankers compared to any shield wearer. I'd rather flank with a Empire Recruit wearing shield and armor than flank with a empire menav, because you dont know if you might end up aimed at by archers in the flanks, you'll very likely be more succesful with the peasant class. Im not really interested in seeing a big damage buff for 2h for sure, but one thing is 100% sure in my mind, they are too vulnerable to arrows and projectiles. Movement speed would be my absolute best choice on how to balance them while giving them that flanking role. No way multiple 2h in the same team would perform well, they'd still get thrown **** in their faces and they still die in 2 sword hits.

 

[CdJrcxx]

Only the savage has the necessary movement speed to flank. What i said is thats how they should be placed in the meta, but its not the case, they do not have any tool that makes them better flankers compared to any shield wearer. I'd rather flank with a Empire Recruit wearing shield and armor than flank with a empire menav, because you dont know if you might end up aimed at by archers in the flanks, you'll very likely be more succesful with the peasant class. Im not really interested in seeing a big damage buff for 2h for sure, but one thing is 100% sure in my mind, they are too vulnerable to arrows and projectiles. Movement speed would be my absolute best choice on how to balance them while giving them that flanking role. No way multiple 2h in the same team would perform well, they'd still get thrown **** in their faces and they still die in 2 sword hits.

I believe they're adjusting stats to individual units soon so that infantry will actually have an advantage in melee and archers had advantage with bows and so on. They're likely going to adjust shock unit stats to make them skilled with two handers and they may possibly also balance unit speeds. This could make them much more valuable flankers. As for vulnerability to archers that's just gonna have to be the tradeoff. I think it would be foolish to give 2 handers anything better than a buckler or something like Eb suggested. If you're being smart about it and actually using your team to draw attention before trying to rush it's still not difficult at all to catch archers unaware in pub matches, maybe with the update it could be a possibility to be quick enough to be a threat even against people communicating. By no means should shock inf be so powerful that they can fill the same roll as heavy inf though. I believe 2H irl only became popular when you could just smack a suit of armor on a dude and all of a sudden arrows weren't as big as a threat, otherwise you'd really want a big shield.

 

[rektasaurus]

What is the value of having 2 infantry classes beyond different armor values? Would it make more sense to have only 1 infantry class but with more options, say:

• 1 handed sword
• 1 handed mace/hammer
• 2 handed sword
• Bladed polearm/spear

Or something similar as the options one of the perk slots? This is piggybacking a little off of @Mabons idea for adjusting the classes with more options for perks, and his list is far more exhaustive but the point still remains. The infantry class could choose whether they want to be shock infantry, shield infantry, skirmisher, or even make something completely new up.

 

[WhiteEyedSh4rk]

2H is naturally just not that effective in Skirmish. Certain classes are better in certain game modes, there is no need to buff them just for this game mode. Your suggestions would just cause a big imbalance. For example, many players in Skirmish use archers, they would become completely useless if some shock troop can just run really fast to them, not even getting appropriate demage and one-hit them.

 

[Mabons]

2H is naturally just not that effective in Skirmish. Certain classes are better in certain game modes, there is no need to buff them just for this game mode. Your suggestions would just cause a big imbalance. For example, many players in Skirmish use archers, they would become completely useless if some shock troop can just run really fast to them, not even getting appropriate demage and one-hit them.

Nonsense, by your same logic cavalry should not be given shields either because they can do the same thing?

 

[WhiteEyedSh4rk]

Nonsense, by your same logic cavalry should not be given shields either because they can do the same thing?

It is fairly easy for an archer to dodge cavalry attacks and shoot their uncovered sides.

 

[Mabons]

It is fairly easy for an archer to dodge cavalry attacks and shoot their uncovered sides.

It is fairly easy for an archer to dodge infantry attacks and shoot their uncovered sides.

 

[Yukmouth++]

I dont see how this could cause imbalance, the 2h classes are not even good in any modes to be honest, not just skirmish, the only reason why they are slightly better in the other modes is the lack of friendly fire, which is non sense to me

 

[Percival!!]

2H is naturally just not that effective in Skirmish. Certain classes are better in certain game modes, there is no need to buff them just for this game mode. Your suggestions would just cause a big imbalance. For example, many players in Skirmish use archers, they would become completely useless if some shock troop can just run really fast to them, not even getting appropriate demage and one-hit them.

Not only archers but infantry too. Movement speed is everything in a melee fight in this game, with a higher movement speed and range it is extremely hard to counter in melee a long ass 2h sword when the person with it is faster than you and can just hit, run out of range, and hit again. Speeding up a class like menavlion which already has a 10 foot weapon would be stupid and make the class unbeatable in melee.These shock classes are fine for flanking if you do it carefully and catch a foot troop in a bad spot because they are so abusable in an actual fight.

The only buff that makes sense for this class is removing throwing weapons from heavy inf because every class having throwing weapons is retarded. Removing menav and glaive from archer class is fine. They are **** perks which no good archer player takes anyway. Anyway, removing throwing weapons alone would be enough to make the class viable by giving it the opportunity to do damage if they can find a fight where the archers can't shoot well/cav can't lance them. Given how strong it is in melee that should be enough, as right now flanking archers if they aren't aware is possible.

However, there is literally no need to give a class with such a huge melee advantage the ability to have a shield and crazy movement speed. The movement speed difference is already stupid enough once you get into melee. But being able to make a push in the open is heavy infantry's job. Survivability isn't something this class should have, otherwise taking real infantry is obsolete and there's no reason not to just spam this unit instead of the more expensive heavy infantry seeing as it would be better in melee and cheaper.

Did I mention that fighting against shock units in melee is cancer?

 

[Yukmouth++]

Not only archers but infantry too. Movement speed is everything in a melee fight in this game, with a higher movement speed and range it is extremely hard to counter in melee a long ass 2h sword when the person with it is faster than you and can just hit, run out of range, and hit again. Speeding up a class like menavlion which already has a 10 foot weapon would be stupid and make the class unbeatable in melee.These shock classes are fine for flanking if you do it carefully and catch a foot troop in a bad spot because they are so abusable in an actual fight.

The only buff that makes sense for this class is removing throwing weapons from heavy inf because every class having throwing weapons is retarded. Removing menav and glaive from archer class is fine. They are **** perks which no good archer player takes anyway. Anyway, removing throwing weapons alone would be enough to make the class viable by giving it the opportunity to do damage if they can find a fight where the archers can't shoot well/cav can't lance them. Given how strong it is in melee that should be enough, as right now flanking archers if they aren't aware is possible.

However, there is literally no need to give a class with such a huge melee advantage the ability to have a shield and crazy movement speed. The movement speed difference is already stupid enough once you get into melee. But being able to make a push in the open is heavy infantry's job. Survivability isn't something this class should have, otherwise taking real infantry is obsolete and there's no reason not to just spam this unit instead of the more expensive heavy infantry seeing as it would be better in melee and cheaper.

Did I mention that fighting against shock units in melee is cancer?

For sure, TW stated there are "too many throwing weapons", but they never said anything about the Heavy Inf + Throwing weapon relationship. I find it extremely underwhelming that these heavy armored units can throw stuff.

 

[Alyss]

For sure, TW stated there are "too many throwing weapons", but they never said anything about the Heavy Inf + Throwing weapon relationship. I find it extremely underwhelming that these heavy armored units can throw stuff.

I wouldn't care about heavy infs having throwing weapons if throwing were actually challenging and required skill. Same goes for archery. The way ranged weapons work in this game makes it so easy.

 

[WhiteEyedSh4rk]

It is fairly easy for an archer to dodge infantry attacks and shoot their uncovered sides.

Thats not true.